Moral
paradox is widely used in today's society, especially in the scope of ethics.
But people's definition of moral paradox is not very clear and definite, and
there are many problems. Therefore, it is urgent to explore the definition of
moral paradox. This article analyzes the phenomena and causes of moral paradox.
So that we can understand more clearly and accurately what the moral paradox
is.

Paradox
is often called paradox in physics. In English, they are the same word,
paradox, or paradox. Of course, from a strict point of view, paradox is only
one kind of paradox, and it is the most important one. Among natural
scientists, paradox is now almost synonymous with paradox. The so-called
paradox, the literal understanding of the "false fallacy", is not
correct on the face of it, but in fact, it is correct, that is, a kind of
statement like "paradox". One is the paradoxical contradiction in its
original sense. Contrary, contrary, contrary to the meaning of sorrow. If one comes
to a conclusion through analysis of certain events that one is thinking about,
however, another conclusion is drawn by another analytical method. Therefore,
people will be trapped in a dilemma of contradictions, unable to give a clear
and reasonable explanation of the incident. This constitutes a paradox. Second,
there are some really wrong assertions, which seem to be reasonable and correct
after the superficial analysis of non-deepening layer, that is, "plausible
but not true", which is the sophistry we usually talk about.

The
concept of moral paradox was proposed by the famous scholar lu jie, who used
the word "moral paradox" in her moral crisis: a modern paradox. In
his first research on the phenomenon of moral paradox, Mr. Lu jie once regarded
moral paradox as a special logical paradox. Later, Mr. Lu jie found that the
mistake was the confusion between the borrowing of methods and the theory of
the subject. Moral paradox phenomenon, refers to the people in the process of
moral choice and value realization is contradictory phenomena of good and evil
at the same time, this kind of phenomenon is objective existence, the fact that
not governed by man's will. It is objective and universal. Based on this basic
fact, the causes of moral paradox are analyzed and understood.

Famous
scholar professor zhang thinks, strictly logical paradox should have three
elements, namely the "acknowledged correct background knowledge",
"careful and correct the logic", "can create contradictions
equivalent type". The concept of moral paradox is borrowed from this
definition, which means that any contradiction phenomenon called moral paradox
should meet these three conditions. In the field of studying moral paradox in
the future, we should stick to the method proposed by professor zhang jianjun,
only having three structural elements of paradox can be called moral paradox.
In this sense, we call the moral paradox a special kind of logical paradox and
attribute it to the family of logical paradoxes. It is justifiable to judge whether
it is a strict or quasi-paradoxical, a broad or a narrow paradox within a
family. However, it is not correct to limit moral paradox to the scope of
logical paradox research or exclude it from the scope of logical paradox
research. Method can borrow, however, is not the transplantation of ontology,
to borrow the moral paradox is logical paradox, the method of logical paradox
can not transplant the subject, see it as a logical paradox derivative "is
a kind of special logical paradox" is not appropriate, they are not the
relationship between "species". Logical paradox is a phenomenon of
thinking, and its "logical mistake" belongs to "correct thought
mistake" -- because it is right, so it is wrong. Moral paradox is a
practical phenomenon, and its "logical error" is a "correct
choice error" -- because the right choice, so the wrong choice. Is, the
moral paradox is essentially the result "line", referred to as
"the theory of" because its "contrast" is that people use
correct moral background knowledge "in", "careful and correct
logic deduction" and "theory" of moral evaluation.

Moral
paradox is formed and presented in the process of social moral value selection
and realization. To some extent, moral paradox should be the paradox of moral
value choice and realization of moral value. Therefore, moral paradox belongs
to the category of moral practice in essence, and is at the structural level of
moral choice and moral evaluation in the knowledge theory system of ethics.

The
quality condition of the subject and the realistic condition that the subject
has, when he wants to implement the good heart and shows the situation that his
efforts are not enough, bad consequences will occur. In the process of
selecting value, the subject itself tends to meet the requirements of the
public, but after its own implementation, it finds that it is not equivalent,
which is also a reason for the paradox.

In
the process of selecting the realization of the subject's value, there are
complex advantages and disadvantages in the specific ethical situation. There
are two kinds of different situations, one is the same of the favorable factors
and unfavorable factors, namely people usually say the body of the behavior,
the reality of the environment and has its own conditions is different, will affect
his mentality and the results of the implementation of the one thing that would
have been different. When the subject considers that the event is beneficial to
him, he will tend to favor the desired result in the process of implementation.
Therefore, the start and implementation of good will have different results.
When there is a conflict between the two, there is a moral paradox. Want to
avoid paradox truly, this is not transfer with the human will, it has certain
universality and objectivity.

The
subject responsible for the causes of different moral paradoxes is the actor
who chooses behavior, that is, the party involved in the strange cycle of moral
paradoxes. In the evaluation of moral paradox, it is impossible for the subject
to feel the psychological experience of others and the emotional experience of
others. If you think you deserve it, you must get it. The subject has no
objective consideration of the occurrence of things, so it lacks certain
attention to others. Especially in this society, people are so important to
their own gain and loss that they care about the immediate interests. Often the
self-evaluation is not very objective and accurate, with a certain degree of
self-nature.

At
present, it is generally accepted that this paradox originates from
"self-referential", so it has formed a solution to the paradox:
eliminating self-referential. Most subsequent paradoxical solutions follow this
pattern. Russell made an in-depth study of this paradox. He first tried to
solve it by using proposition stratification, but failed. It turned out that
the problem had raised concerns about paradoxes. Susan huck what is given
according to this problem is the basic standard of paradox, her standards have
been put forward by the academic circles generally accepted, namely must be
independent of the evidence for causing the paradox of the conclusion of this
expression or inference principle.